A Friday series exploring Startups and the people who make them go. Read allIf the Shoe Fits posts here

In the right frame of MAPping Company Success it says, “Have a quick question or just want to chat?” along with both email and phone number.

A few weeks ago a “John,” a founder, called me to see if I had any idea why his turnover was so high.

In response to my questions he described his company’s culture, management style, product, etc.

I told him that assuming what he said was what was actually happening then something else was going on.

Since we are several thousand miles apart, we came up with the idea of using a stationary camcorder to tape the interactions; a “set it and forget it” approach to capture the norm and not performances.

A few days later he sent me a link to see the results.

I choked at the length, but it didn’t take that long to find what the likely problem was.

To see if my instinct was correct, I watched the entire nine hours on fast forward.

What I saw was that, almost without exception, during every interaction John had, whether with programmers or senior staff, he interrupted them to take calls or respond to texts.

We discussed the ramifications and effects of the constant interruptions and I asked him how he would feel if they had acted the same way.

He said it had happened to him and he usually felt annoyed, offended or both.

So I asked why they would feel any different.

John said that also explained why one senior developer said he preferred to work where he was shown some respect.

John had chalked it up to the developer’s age and that he couldn’t handle the casual atmosphere, but thinking back the guy had had a good relationship and no problems with the team.

I suggested that instead of saying anything he just change, i.e., pay attention and not interrupt, since actions speak louder than words.

I also sent him this image as a constant reminder.

John went further than changing; he called the most recent three who had left, apologized and said he would like them to come back.

One had already accepted a job, but the other two decided to give it another shot.

They both said that his candidness, honesty in recognizing the problem and sincere apology made it likely he would follow through.

Some people think certain questions are the secret to good hiring, and while they are useful they aren’t silver bullets.

However, good questions asked correctly can tell you how the candidate thinks, which is far more valuable than where they went to school, previously worked, position held or even current skills. This is especially true if your goal is to increase creativity and innovation.

For those bosses who think that hiring is a waste of time, not to mention a pain in the patootie, I remind you that the only thing more important than acquiring talent is keeping what you have.

And if doing a good job isn’t enough, keep in mind that as a boss (any kind/any level) your reviews/raises are a function of your team’s performance not just your own.

It’s a well-documented fact that attitude/cultural fit are the most crucial factors when hiring, so where’s the sense in dumping people who are not only good cultural fits, but also possess institutional knowledge?

The graphic elegantly sums up the fear of the cost minimizers and the pragmatism of the astute.

As to ROI, look no further than Frederick Reichheld, founder of Bain & Company’s Loyalty Practice and author ofLoyalty Rules!, and other loyalty books, whose carefully researched studies that a 5% improvement in employee retention translates to a 25%-100% gain in earnings.

That is one hell of a return for creating a culture that does the right thing by investing in its people.

“Titstare is an app where you take photos of yourself staring at tits.” –David Boulton and Jethro Batts at the TechCrunch Disrupt hackathon

Not to mention those who defended it.

“It is not misogyny to tell a sexist joke, or to fail to take a woman seriously, or to enjoy boobies” –Pax Dickinson, co-founder and CTO, Glimpse Labs

Or the incredible level of ignorance and pure stupidity exemplified by White_N_Nerdy on Reddit.

“I’m honestly trying to understand why anyone says that females are ‘needed’ in the tech industry.” He continued: “The tech community works fine without females, just like any other mostly male industry. Feminists probably just want women making more money.”

Being old enough to remember, medicine, research and law were “mostly male” industries not that long ago—as were college and advanced degrees.

In the comments section of the article, many women say that prior to the Nineties women developers and engineers weren’t subject to nearly as much abusive harassment, which matches my memories from when I was a tech recruiter in the late Seventies through the Eighties.

What happened?

Please join me tomorrow for a look at what may be an epiphany of cause and effect for both ageism and sexism.

It’s well known that what goes up comes down; programmers know that ‘garbage in/garbage out’ always holds true (and applies to more than programming, but that’s another post) and bosses (should) know that at some point current employees become former employees.

While people leave because of layoffs, it’s often by choice; either way it’s bad news and, like all bad news, requires clear communications to avoid repercussions.

However, there’s one repercussion that even the best communications can’t avoid and that’s what I call boss/company stupidity or BCS.

Granted, there’s a lot of BCS floating around the workplace, but this particular BCS ranks in the top three.

Ian Larkin is an assistant professor Harvard Business School and he shared some interesting research last spring.

The study focused on the effect of rewards, and although the subjects were laundry plant workers the results apply to knowledge workers, too.

The plan rewarded workers for being on time and not missing days.

The results were not as expected and productivity dropped.

In other words, the rewards plan ended up demotivating the workers.

Why?

Because it was easily gamed and structured to reward actions that were an expected part of the job, such as being on time.

Rewards should always be for going above and beyond the job description, showing initiative, creativity, reaching out to support not just the team, but others with whom they interface, etc.

It’s also important to remember that money isn’t always the best reward.

Most studies have proved that praise is an excellent driver of performance, productivity and good feelings—public recognition/kudos usually carries more weight than bought rewards such as meals or movie tickets.

“You can’t put a price on that. The recognition of hearing you did a good job and that others are hearing about it is worth more than money.”

The main thing to remember is that awards aren’t a solve-all panacea for an ailing team.

“You can’t say awards are good or bad. It depends on how they’re implemented.”

Not because I’m a motorcycle nut, but because they do everything I believe makes a company successful—not to mention all the stuff about which I know nothing.

What I do know is that Harley proves there is more than one way to skin a cat.

They didn’t outsource manufacturing; they didn’t bust their union; they didn’t dump people for robots—in fact, there are no robots on the main assembly line.

They did redesign production to take advantage of the knowledge inherent in line workers with an average tenure of 18 years.

There are around 1,200 different configurations, and a new bike starts its way through the production line every 80 seconds. Virtually each one is unique, and workers have no idea what’s coming 80 seconds later. Surprisingly, robots can’t adjust on the fly like that.

They did spread 150 problem-solvers through the 5-6 man production teams that hand-build each bike.

Every time a new bike came down the line, it took a few extra shoves to push it into place. In fact, it took an extra 1.2 seconds. But Dettinger, who had spent some 20 years at the York plant, knew that every second counted. With 400 motorcycles built each shift, on two shifts a day, an extra 1.2 seconds per bike added up to 2,200 lost bikes annually. Millions could be lost in revenue. Maybe it wasn’t such a small problem.

Each problem-solver has the same core mission: “to monitor his small section of the production line and search for better ways to make motorcycles.”

For decades, management and economists have driven a mantra that to prosper manufacturing in the US meant no unions, low wages and no benefits.

At Harley, costs have fallen by $100 million and the stock is trading around $62 (it was around ten in January 2009).

Most importantly, from a customer’s viewpoint, what used to be an 18 month wait from order to pick-up is now two weeks.

Harley went against the tide and the results are proof that the “experts” aren’t always right.

“There’s a huge gap across the generations in terms of how people look at the whole question of time and commitment and what that means,” said Stewart D. Friedman, director of the Wharton Work/Life Integration Project and the author of “Baby Bust: New Choices for Men and Women in Work and Family.”

They crave transparently, have little patience with corporate games and vote with their feet when stymied.

“People are just more disaffected now with that kind of lifestyle and want to have a greater sense of control,” Mr. Friedman said. “Where companies don’t provide that sense of meaning and purpose, their brand as employer is weakened. They’re not going to be able to compete for the best and the brightest.”

aMillenial-style entitlement is even invading the hallowed halls of Wall Street.

“The longstanding tradition of 100-hour work weeks, that’s not going to be easy to change, but I applaud these efforts,” Mr. Friedman said. “The young people, after two years in an analyst program at a bank on Wall Street, they’re burnt out, they’re saying ‘I don’t want to live like this.’”

Given the attitude, you can expect careers, from medicine to finance, that have historically included long hours, total immersion, high stress and total commitment to change and the changes will be wrenching.

What it means to business, both large and small, is a willingness to provide meaningful work as opposed to just a paycheck—no matter how fat.

Please join me Friday for a first person look at this change and another view on what’s driving it.